|
General » rec.autos.driving » Today's "responsible" cyclists.
| Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796890] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 01:40 |
|
On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
illegal.) The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
(or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
after sunset) when I saw them. I did not see them pass a stop-sign
controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.
I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796896 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 02:36 |
|
On Mar 3, 6:40=A0pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. =A0One
> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
> was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
> that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
> illegal.) =A0The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
> way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
> (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) =A0Both=
> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
> after sunset) when I saw them. =A0I did not see them pass a stop-sign
> controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
> gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.=
>
> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>
> nate
I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
Regards,
Cullen
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796897 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 02:49 |
|
On Mar 3, 7:36=A0pm, "ccar... [at] new.rr.com" <ccar... [at] new.rr.com> wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:40=A0pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. =A0One
> > appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
> > was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on=
> > that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
> > illegal.) =A0The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
> > way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels=
> > (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) =A0Bo=
th
> > riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
> > after sunset) when I saw them. =A0I did not see them pass a stop-sign
> > controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
> > gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled tha=
t.
>
> > I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> > did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>
> > nate
>
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
>
> Regards,
> Cullen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Given the law of proportions, it's about equal to operators of
motorized vehicles. It reminds me of the proverbial tobacco-chewing
pickup driver passing people at 60 in a 35 with an exhaust sound
resembling a bad case of flatulence pointed at a microphone connected
to a system of wall-to-wall Marshalls.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796898 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 02:50 |
|
> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
>> was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
>> that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
>> illegal.) The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
>> way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
>> (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
>> after sunset) when I saw them. I did not see them pass a stop-sign
>> controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
>> gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.
>>
>> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
ccarter [at] new.rr.com wrote:
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
Yes. Yes he is. Sad, eh?
\\paul
--
Paul M. Hobson
..:change the f to ph to reply:.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796906 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 03:33 |
|
In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any flashy
jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back when I rode
the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys who were
serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my money or even
beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear and an expensive
looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every time with my worn out
raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a college student and I rode
a lot in those days... I got tired of throwing money into the bike)
> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
> way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
> (or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
> after sunset) when I saw them.
Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking. The
last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the normal
riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my bicycle, but
worse... deer decide to run left or right after a pause... stupid humans
keep coming right at me.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796911 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 03:45 |
|
ccarter [at] new.rr.com wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
>
>>On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything; he
>>was properly lit but I saw him blow a stop sign (I'll give him a pass on
>>that one as he was turning right, although it was still technically
>>illegal.) The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
>>way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
>>(or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
>>after sunset) when I saw them. I did not see them pass a stop-sign
>>controlled intersection, but seeing as how they were riding in the
>>gutter going the wrong way, I'm not sure how they would have handled that.
>>
>>I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>>did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>>
>>nate
>
>
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
>
> Regards,
> Cullen
My point is that today is not unusual in terms of cyclist behavior
observed, despite the protestations of certain people posting to RAD
apparently from rec.bicycles.misc. In fact, today's observations are
EXACTLY what I expect on any given day.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796922 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 04:13 |
|
Nate Nagel <njnagel [at] roosters.net> wrote in
news:fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com:
>
> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>
> nate
>
I hear that but i must also mention that i do not observe 80% of cyclists
exceeding the speed limit and i do not observe 20% using a cell.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796925 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 04:15 |
|
Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> Nate Nagel <njnagel [at] roosters.net> wrote in
> news:fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com:
>
>
>>I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>>did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>>
>>nate
>>
>
>
> I hear that but i must also mention that i do not observe 80% of cyclists
> exceeding the speed limit and i do not observe 20% using a cell.
I've actually seen a cyclist using a cell phone. must have had a
special death wish.
nate
(yes, I KNOW it's a troll.)
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796944 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 04:45 |
|
On Tue, 04 Mar 2008 03:13:43 -0000, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
MURDERERS" <xeton2001 [at] yahoo.com> wrote:
>Nate Nagel <njnagel [at] roosters.net> wrote in
>news:fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com:
>
>>
>> I did NOT observe 33% of the motorists rolling through stop signs, nor
>> did I observe 66% of motorists driving without lights after dark.
>>
>> nate
>>
>
>I hear that but i must also mention that i do not observe 80% of cyclists
>exceeding the speed limit
Moron. The average cyclist is not even capable of attaining such
speeds.
> d i do not observe 20% using a cell.
And I've never seen a cyclist with sandpaper threaded tires or
inoperative brakes - two things you have admitted to doing with your
scud.
Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS (a.k.a. SFB) admits to being
a deadly speeder, psychopath and criminal coddler:
"> Have you ever driven a car faster than the legal speed limit?
Yes, but never deliberately. In fact i got a speeding ticket about 5
years ago for doing 41 in a 25. I just about kicked the cops teeth in
cause i was sure he was lying. No way the SL on this wide open
stretch could be 25, i thought."
Pride of America (c.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend/
laura bush - VEHICULAR HOMICIDE/Speeders And Drunk Drivers
Are Murderers (SADDAM)), 10/3/2002
Message-ID: <3c1753f7.0210030916.7b6f5dff [at] posting.google.com>
http://tinyurl.com/5u4wg
Proof that POA is LBMHB/lbVH/SADDAM:
See the following: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796963 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 05:10 |
|
Brent P wrote:
> In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>>On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>
>
> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any flashy
> jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back when I rode
> the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys who were
> serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my money or even
> beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear and an expensive
> looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every time with my worn out
> raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a college student and I rode
> a lot in those days... I got tired of throwing money into the bike)
I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
now have a Raleigh.
But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
"Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong
>>way down a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels
>>(or the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g. well
>>after sunset) when I saw them.
>
> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking. The
> last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the normal
> riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my bicycle, but
> worse... deer decide to run left or right after a pause... stupid humans
> keep coming right at me.
Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
SMH
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796969 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 05:22 |
|
ccarter [at] new.rr.com wrote:
> On Mar 3, 6:40 pm, Nate Nagel <njna... [at] roosters.net> wrote:
{all non-troll material left intact}
> I'm trying to figure out the point of this post. You're not implying
> that all cyclists are like those cyclists you observed, are you?
Plonked troll was trolling, which is why the plonked troll is a plonked
troll.
Bill "take the hint?" S.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796973 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 05:33 |
|
Stephen Harding wrote:
> Brent P wrote:
>
>> In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>
>>
>>
>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys
>> who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my
>> money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear
>> and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every
>> time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a
>> college student and I rode a lot in those days... I got tired of
>> throwing money into the bike)
>
>
> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
> now have a Raleigh.
>
> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>
>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down a
>>> busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or the
>>> front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g.
>>> well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>
>>
>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.
>
>
> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more
to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
per-encounter basis.
Let's face it. the people that are going to bother to search out a
newsgroup with "bicycles" in the title are not the same people that are
making up their own rules as they ride out there one the roads. Just
like the vast majority of people driving could give two shits about
actually driving, and would be astounded that anyone would care enough
about it to find a Usenet group about it.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796979 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 05:57 |
|
Nate Nagel wrote:
> Stephen Harding wrote:
>> Brent P wrote:
>>
>>> In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>
>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys
>>> who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my
>>> money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear
>>> and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every
>>> time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a
>>> college student and I rode a lot in those days... I got tired of
>>> throwing money into the bike)
>>
>>
>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
>> now have a Raleigh.
>>
>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
>> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>
>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) Both
>>>> riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM (e.g.
>>>> well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>>
>>>
>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.
>>
>>
>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
>
> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more
> to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
> per-encounter basis.[...]
>
Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
you.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796981 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 06:03 |
|
On Mon, 03 Mar 2008 20:33:39 -0600,
tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>
>I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any flashy
>jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back when I rode
>the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the guys who were
>serious and they were the ones that would give a run for my money or even
>beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the latest gear and an expensive
>looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat them every time with my worn out
>raleigh with its kmart tires... (hey, I was a college student and I rode
>a lot in those days...
Weekend Warriors are no match for a dedicated commuter over their
regular route. Harmless racing between commuters occurs but is tacky.
Commuting and utility cyclists are serious cyclists. Serious cyclists
can most often be recognised by their compliance with vehicle code
regulations and other practical accessories. They generally ride in a
vehicular manner which means they too will do rolling stops,
unsignalled turns and take the occasional counter-flow convenience
just like automobile drivers. However, they'll often employ their
vehicles' superior maneuverability to confound the caged commuters
left stewing in the gridlocked clusterfuk they made for themselves.
>( I got tired of throwing money into the bike)
Throwing money into a bike? A person can spend more annually just
maintaining their tennis racquet.
Two chains, two tires and four brake pads usually does me for a year
of daily transportation. Occasional cog, rim and chain ring
replacement is interspersed over five years.
I have more than one bike so that spreads the wear. Some days, some
destinations and some whims demand different bikes. Maintaining
eleven bikes for a year probably costs me less than two months of
insurance on only one of your cars.
--
zk
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #796983 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 06:04 |
|
Tom Sherman wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
>> Stephen Harding wrote:
>>
>>> Brent P wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the
>>>> guys who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run
>>>> for my money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the
>>>> latest gear and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat
>>>> them every time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires...
>>>> (hey, I was a college student and I rode a lot in those days... I
>>>> got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
>>> now have a Raleigh.
>>>
>>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
>>> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
>>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
>>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>>
>>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
>>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
>>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)
>>>>> Both riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM
>>>>> (e.g. well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
>>
>>
>> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have
>> more to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on
>> a per-encounter basis.[...]
>>
> Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
> teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
> you.
>
No she won't - I'll be able to see her and avoid her. That's the whole
point. Both are hazards to be sure, but the bicyclist is the one that
scares me more. The day I can't get away from a Yukon (I haven't seen a
Suburban nameplate in years) drifting into my lane is the day I probably
need to turn in my driver's license (or buy a better car, as the case
may be.)
It was actually fortunate this evening that I decided to drive the
Fabulous BeaterPorsche with its e-code headlights instead of my company
Impala, it gave me an extra second or so to see the wrong-way riders
before I made a right turn directly in front of their path.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797003 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 14:09 |
|
In article <fqil8l01mht [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
> Tom Sherman wrote:
>> Nate Nagel wrote:
>>
>>> Stephen Harding wrote:
>>>
>>>> Brent P wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <fqi5qj01410 [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. One
>>>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
>>>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back
>>>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the
>>>>> guys who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run
>>>>> for my money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the
>>>>> latest gear and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat
>>>>> them every time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires...
>>>>> (hey, I was a college student and I rode a lot in those days... I
>>>>> got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
>>>> now have a Raleigh.
>>>>
>>>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! I don't go much
>>>> with the jersey stuff. The real high powered bicyclists are often
>>>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
>>>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>>>>
>>>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down
>>>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or
>>>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.)
>>>>>> Both riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM
>>>>>> (e.g. well after sunset) when I saw them.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
>>>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the
>>>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
>>>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
>>>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
>>>
>>>
>>> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have
>>> more to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on
>>> a per-encounter basis.[...]
>>>
>> Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
>> teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kill
>> you.
>>
>
> No she won't - I'll be able to see her and avoid her. That's the whole
> point. Both are hazards to be sure, but the bicyclist is the one that
> scares me more. The day I can't get away from a Yukon (I haven't seen a
> Suburban nameplate in years) drifting into my lane is the day I probably
> need to turn in my driver's license (or buy a better car, as the case
> may be.)
>
> It was actually fortunate this evening that I decided to drive the
> Fabulous BeaterPorsche with its e-code headlights instead of my company
> Impala, it gave me an extra second or so to see the wrong-way riders
> before I made a right turn directly in front of their path.
They don't understand that when mr. wrong way does something really
stupid and ends up hitting the windshield and bending an A pillar or the
roof, practically anything older than 'just left the dealer lot' is
totalled.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797007 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 14:33 |
|
On Mar 4, 8:09=A0am, tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
> In article <fqil8l01... [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
> > Tom Sherman wrote:
> >> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> >>> Stephen Harding wrote:
>
> >>>> Brent P wrote:
>
> >>>>> In article <fqi5qj01... [at] news2.newsguy.com>, Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> >>>>>> On my way home from the Metro station, I saw three cyclists. =A0One=
> >>>>>> appeared to be a "serious" cyclist with the jersey and everything;
>
> >>>>> I consider a serious bicyclist to be the kind that don't have any
> >>>>> flashy jerseys and their bike has no two components that match. Back=
> >>>>> when I rode the lake front trail in chicago daily those were the
> >>>>> guys who were serious and they were the ones that would give a run
> >>>>> for my money or even beat me. The 'serious looking' ones in the
> >>>>> latest gear and an expensive looking bicycle.... bah... I would beat=
> >>>>> them every time with my worn out raleigh with its kmart tires...
> >>>>> (hey, I was a college student and I rode a lot in those days... I
> >>>>> got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>
> >>>> I got tired of "putting money" into one of my old mountain bikes and
> >>>> now have a Raleigh.
>
> >>>> But geez, what's going on here??!!! I agree with you!! =A0I don't go =
much
> >>>> with the jersey stuff. =A0The real high powered bicyclists are often
> >>>> "Freds" that look oh so out of style with old bikes, but ride them
> >>>> mile upon mile over the course of a year.
>
> >>>>>> The other two cyclists were riding in the gutter the wrong way down=
> >>>>>> a busy four-lane road, no lights, reflectors only on the wheels (or=
> >>>>>> the front ones were so out of adjustment I couldn't see them.) =A0
> >>>>>> Both riders were wearing dark clothing, and it was about 7:45 PM
> >>>>>> (e.g. well after sunset) when I saw them.
>
> >>>>> Those are the kind I dislike the most. Especially when I am biking.
> >>>>> The last wrong-way I encountered at night was towards the end of the=
> >>>>> normal riding season here.... like a deer in the headlamp of my
> >>>>> bicycle, but worse... deer decide to run left or right after a
> >>>>> pause... stupid humans keep coming right at me. =A0
>
> >>>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventuall=
y.
>
> >>> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have
> >>> more to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on=
> >>> a per-encounter basis.[...]
>
> >> Yes, but the cyclist will at worst do cosmetic damage to your car. The
> >> teenager texting while driving daddy's Subdivision, er Suburban may kil=
l
> >> you.
>
> > No she won't - I'll be able to see her and avoid her. =A0That's the whol=
e
> > point. =A0Both are hazards to be sure, but the bicyclist is the one that=
> > scares me more. =A0The day I can't get away from a Yukon (I haven't seen=
a
> > Suburban nameplate in years) drifting into my lane is the day I probably=
> > need to turn in my driver's license (or buy a better car, as the case
> > may be.)
>
> > It was actually fortunate this evening that I decided to drive the
> > Fabulous BeaterPorsche with its e-code headlights instead of my company
> > Impala, it gave me an extra second or so to see the wrong-way riders
> > before I made a right turn directly in front of their path.
>
> They don't understand that when mr. wrong way does something really
> stupid and ends up hitting the windshield and bending an A pillar or the
> roof, practically anything older than 'just left the dealer lot' is
> totalled.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
It depends a lot on the make and value of the car as well. They'll
scrap an easily repairable civic in a heartbeat, but they'll go to
crazy extents to "save" a caddy that has about had it.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797063 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 21:36 |
|
Nate Nagel wrote:
> Stephen Harding wrote:
>>
>> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.
>
> And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more
> to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
> per-encounter basis.
I think it's wasted worry. Just not significant enough to bother with.
> Let's face it. the people that are going to bother to search out a
> newsgroup with "bicycles" in the title are not the same people that are
> making up their own rules as they ride out there one the roads. Just
> like the vast majority of people driving could give two shits about
> actually driving, and would be astounded that anyone would care enough
> about it to find a Usenet group about it.
I think people who actually use a bike for transport (in place of a car)
are probably going to be far better in traffic than even experienced
motorists simply because the penalties are too high not to be better.
Then one has the kids and who knows what they'll do.
And an intermediate group that are adult or enthusiasts, but regard
the bike as the best of both the motoring and pedaling worlds. They
can ride on the road, pedal past jammed traffic, yet pass through
intersections like a pedestrian, travel on a sidewalk or wrong way on
a road, or make a "quick trip" to the convenience store at night without
lighting.
I believe statistics predict if you ride the wrong side of the road
or at night without lighting, you're probably headed for the fatality
column of some government accident report at some point in your future.
SMH
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797064 ] |
Tue, 04 March 2008 21:47 |
|
Zoot Katz wrote:
> tetraethylleadREMOVETHIS [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>
>>( I got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>
> Throwing money into a bike? A person can spend more annually just
> maintaining their tennis racquet.
>
> Two chains, two tires and four brake pads usually does me for a year
> of daily transportation. Occasional cog, rim and chain ring
> replacement is interspersed over five years.
>
> I have more than one bike so that spreads the wear. Some days, some
> destinations and some whims demand different bikes. Maintaining
> eleven bikes for a year probably costs me less than two months of
> insurance on only one of your cars.
I actually "got tired" of fixes for my beloved Mongoose.
It recently broke a rear axle and rear deraileur. I could
always put a $30 new deraileur and another $35 (6-speed freewheel)
wheel on it but I've done that three times now over the past 6 years.
Six speed cogs are getting harder to find (that start lower than 14t)
and upgrading means a cascade of related replacements (shifter,
perhaps cable, perhaps brake as well since the two were combined and
maybe more).
Heck with it! Nearly $500 got me an 8-speed cogset Raleigh MTB with
front shocks and disk brakes. Very smooth Alivio shifting compared
with what I was used to, and a larger frame that makes the bike much
more comfortable to ride.
Every bike has its season!
SMH
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797157 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 16:42 |
|
On Mar 4, 3:47=A0pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
> Zoot Katz wrote:
> > tetraethylleadREMOVET... [at] yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote:
>
> >>( I got tired of throwing money into the bike)
>
> > Throwing money into a bike? =A0A person can spend more annually just
> > maintaining their tennis racquet.
>
> > Two chains, two tires and four brake pads usually does me for a year
> > of daily transportation. =A0Occasional cog, rim and chain ring
> > replacement is interspersed over five years.
>
> > I have more than one bike so that spreads the wear. Some days, some
> > destinations and some whims demand different bikes. Maintaining
> > eleven bikes for a year probably costs me less than two months of
> > insurance on only one of your cars.
>
> I actually "got tired" of fixes for my beloved Mongoose.
>
> It recently broke a rear axle and rear deraileur. =A0I could
> always put a $30 new deraileur and another $35 (6-speed freewheel)
> wheel on it but I've done that three times now over the past 6 years.
>
> Six speed cogs are getting harder to find (that start lower than 14t)
> and upgrading means a cascade of related replacements (shifter,
> perhaps cable, perhaps brake as well since the two were combined and
> maybe more).
>
> Heck with it! =A0Nearly $500 got me an 8-speed cogset Raleigh MTB with
> front shocks and disk brakes. =A0Very smooth Alivio shifting compared
> with what I was used to, and a larger frame that makes the bike much
> more comfortable to ride.
>
> Every bike has its season!
>
> SMH- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Do you ever consider using things like greenways in order to avoid
traffic while you are cycling? I've found them to be more scenic, less
stressful, and of course--minus distracted drivers!
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797162 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 17:18 |
|
On Mar 5, 10:42 am, ktmac... [at] hotmail.com wrote:
>
>
> Do you ever consider using things like greenways in order to avoid
> traffic while you are cycling? I've found them to be more scenic, less
> stressful, and of course--minus distracted drivers!
I frequently use one short "multi-use path" simply because it starts
two blocks from my house and runs directly toward my workplace, taking
me to the best "riding" street going that direction. But don't
overestimate the significance. It's only one block long.
Overall, I'd guess less than 1% of my riding is on such things. Why?
Because except for that one block cut-through, they aren't available
where I'm riding, and they don't take me where I want or need to go.
Furthermore, unless someone builds another handy little shortcut like
that, they never will. There is just no way to put practical MUPs in
most places.
What I won't do is put my bike in my car and haul it out to the
closest such path, about five miles away, ride back and forth, then
drive home. In general, when I want to ride my bike, I don't want to
drive my car.
- Frank Krygowski
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797165 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 17:32 |
|
On Mar 5, 10:42=A0am, ktmac... [at] hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Do you ever consider using things like greenways in =A0order to avoid
> traffic while you are cycling? I've found them to be more scenic, less
> stressful, and of course--minus distracted drivers!
Around here, they don't get plowed of snow, so they're useless for
months each year. During the summer, they're just longer and slower,
but sometimes they make a nice change.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797171 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 18:54 |
|
On Mar 4, 3:36=A0pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
> Nate Nagel wrote:
> > Stephen Harding wrote:
>
> >> Those are the types that end up as bike fatality statistics eventually.=
>
> > And still y'all don't believe me when I say that I feel like I have more=
> > to worry about from cyclists than from other drivers, at least on a
> > per-encounter basis.
>
> I think it's wasted worry. =A0Just not significant enough to bother with.
I disagree. that was the whole point; I'm tired of seeing cyclists
"just in time" when simply by having a light there would be no issue
whatsoever.
>
> > Let's face it. =A0the people that are going to bother to search out a
> > newsgroup with "bicycles" in the title are not the same people that are
> > making up their own rules as they ride out there one the roads. =A0Just
> > like the vast majority of people driving could give two shits about
> > actually driving, and would be astounded that anyone would care enough
> > about it to find a Usenet group about it.
>
> I think people who actually use a bike for transport (in place of a car)
> are probably going to be far better in traffic than even experienced
> motorists simply because the penalties are too high not to be better.
>
> Then one has the kids and who knows what they'll do.
>
> And an intermediate group that are adult or enthusiasts, but regard
> the bike as the best of both the motoring and pedaling worlds. =A0They
> can ride on the road, pedal past jammed traffic, yet pass through
> intersections like a pedestrian, travel on a sidewalk or wrong way on
> a road, or make a "quick trip" to the convenience store at night without
> lighting.
>
> I believe statistics predict if you ride the wrong side of the road
> or at night without lighting, you're probably headed for the fatality
> column of some government accident report at some point in your future.
Then they must be breeding like mad, because there's a lot of them.
Or else the local drivers are just too blase to cuss them out,
complain to the police, whatever.
nate
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797176 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 19:56 |
|
On Mar 5, 11:54 am, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 4, 3:36 pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
> I disagree. that was the whole point; I'm tired of seeing cyclists
> "just in time" when simply by having a light there would be no issue
> whatsoever.
it sounds like you need to slow down if stuff is sneaking up on you
while you're driving. I don't understand why all you people want to
drive your cars on the roads where all those bicyclists are anyway...
why don't you just go drive on the freeway where non-motorized
vehicles are prohibited? I mean pulling your head out and paying
attention while piloting a 3klb machine down the public roadway should
be no issue whatsoever... I just don't understand why all y'all gotta
kill 44,000 people every year, so apparently paying attention is an
issue for you and your ilk.
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797182 ] |
Wed, 05 March 2008 20:30 |
|
On Mar 5, 1:56=A0pm, DennisTheBald <DennisTheB... [at] gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mar 5, 11:54 am, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 4, 3:36 pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
> > I disagree. =A0that was the whole point; I'm tired of seeing cyclists
> > "just in time" when simply by having a light there would be no issue
> > whatsoever.
>
> it sounds like you need to slow down if stuff is sneaking up on you
> while you're driving. =A0I don't understand why all you people want to
> drive your cars on the roads where all those bicyclists are anyway...
> why don't you just go drive on the freeway where non-motorized
> vehicles are prohibited? =A0I mean pulling your head out and paying
> attention while piloting a 3klb machine down the public roadway should
> be no issue whatsoever... I just don't understand why all y'all gotta
> kill 44,000 people every year, so apparently paying attention is an
> issue for you and your ilk.
let me guess, you ride without a light after dark too?
nate
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797195 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 01:30 |
|
DennisTheBald <DennisTheBald [at] gmail.com> wrote in news:87ce90db-ec86-49d5-
a579-66a0ad09d42b [at] i29g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> On Mar 5, 11:54 am, N8N <njna... [at] hotmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 4, 3:36 pm, Stephen Harding <smhardin... [at] msn.com> wrote:
>
>> I disagree. that was the whole point; I'm tired of seeing cyclists
>> "just in time" when simply by having a light there would be no issue
>> whatsoever.
>
> it sounds like you need to slow down if stuff is sneaking up on you
> while you're driving. I don't understand why all you people want to
> drive your cars on the roads where all those bicyclists are anyway...
> why don't you just go drive on the freeway where non-motorized
> vehicles are prohibited? I mean pulling your head out and paying
> attention while piloting a 3klb machine down the public roadway should
> be no issue whatsoever... I just don't understand why all y'all gotta
> kill 44,000 people every year, so apparently paying attention is an
> issue for you and your ilk.
>
>
>
>
if it came down to it,you can be sure that bicycles would be banned from
public roads instead of the opposite.
(Unless the Greens took over)
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797260 ] |
Thu, 06 March 2008 19:47 |
|
ktmac_07 [at] hotmail.com wrote:
> Do you ever consider using things like greenways in order to avoid
> traffic while you are cycling? I've found them to be more scenic, less
> stressful, and of course--minus distracted drivers!
If by "greenway" you mean a bike path, yes I use a local
bike path quite frequently during summer commutes for
the very reasons you mention: scenic and calm.
However they don't plow them during winter so you can
only choose roads for the commute, most of which aren't
too bad.
SMH
|
|
|
| Re: Today's "responsible" cyclists. [message #797310 ] |
Fri, 07 March 2008 05:28 |
|
ktmac_07 [at] hotmail.com wrote:
>
> Do you ever consider using things like greenways in order to avoid
> traffic while you are cycling? I've found them to be more scenic, less
> stressful, and of course--minus distracted drivers!
Due to the pedestrians, dog walkers, munchkins, poor sight lines, low
design speeds and worst of all, unprotected crossings of busy roads,
multi-use paths are LESS safe than riding on the street.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
The weather is here, wish you were beautiful
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Thu Jan 8 03:04:21 CET 2009
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0.12159 Sekunden |
